" Does the SPCA think they're CSIS?"
Published in Saanich News on Jul 28, 2004
Story URL: http://web.bcnewsgroup.com/portals-code/list.cgi?cat=48&paper=28&id=273815

When the BC-SPCA asks for the public's support in the form of donations, it has a responsibility to provide that same public with information about its practices.
The DTA4 assessment, a behavioral profiling tool for newly-arrived dogs at SPCAs, is coming to Victoria in September. This is a cause of grave concern among some animal welfare groups, who say the tool makes it easier to euthanize dogs. They point to several incidences of this in the Lower Mainland, where the criteria are already in place, but their criticisms are based on a small portion of a leaked copy of the DTA4 report.
One would think they'd be up in arms demanding the report be released in full so as to make an informed critique, but some of the people leading the charge against the Victoria SPCA had not even read the 15 pages that were leaked. As a result, there is an abundance of misinformation about DTA4 floating around. Some activists, for example, are under the impression that one of the tests involves giving the dog a bone and then taking it away, which is not true.
The BC-SPCA performs an invaluable service in the rescue and rehabilitation of tens of thousands of animals every year. It also employs many compassionate and dedicated staff and volunteers. Were it not for them, thousands of abandoned or stray animals would be homeless or dead. The SPCA could have saved itself a whole lot of bad press by making the DTA4 assessment public before it was implemented anywhere in the province.
The justification for withholding it is that the research by Dr. Rebecca Ledger has not yet been published, but is upcoming in the journal Anthrozoos. Even so, what was their rush? Would it have been so terrible to postpone DTA4 implementation until the research was out?
The worst thing an organization can do when faced with a controversy is keep things secret. Some of the people protesting the DTA4 have legitimate concerns that deserve to be addressed. Since the DTA4 criteria and their purpose were not stated clearly at the outset, the SPCA is now in the unfortunate position of having to defend itself against rumours and hearsay. That said, activists have no right to accuse the SPCA of murdering dogs based on criteria and research they know very little about. If they are looking for something to protest, they should be after the SPCA to make this criteria public and cut down on the self-righteous hand-wringing.
Even organizations with the best of intentions have a responsibility to be transparent. The SPCA is not exactly the Canadian Security and Intelligence Security. The DTA4 criteria should have been made public so there could be an intelligent and informed debate on the subject before it was implemented anywhere. To conceal it shows a contempt for those who genuinely care about dogs and have legitimate concerns.